I could have added to the quarantine thread but I thought I'd make a clean something here.

I haven't taken it down yet, I will in a moment but I thought I'd let the 'Team' know that that's what I'm doing. Which brings me to why. Not because of anything here forum wise and I just wanted to share with those perpetual tweakers... more stuff.

This morning I installed Debian Live squeeze 64, upgraded and dist-upgraded to SID. I found that all the files save Remastersys (squeeze) were already present for example: live-initramfs, boot-live, live-config etc. that weren't in Aptosid. All the issues regarding Remastersys except for one weren't present. Internet, yes. Install to hd installs grub, gdm all good. The only issue seems to be with the live dvd rebooting the pc. Other than that I'm writing you from my second LXDE/e17 remaster of the day.

I don't know if it would work for you but what the hey. hay? And !'ll be honest in saying the only reason at least for now- for not exploring Pyfll is the learning curve. I do want to look into it more though. I was pretty darn happy it went so smoothly. A few days ago I tried this with one of my previous already tweaked systems and it didn't work. But it did with the fresh Live Squeeze.

I know you were only doing this remaster for learning and to have a little fun and shame you got slammed for it instead by staff. Truly it is sad that new people like you come here with nice ideas only to get roundly criticized by staff when all you wanted was advice and suggestions.

Thanx DD, I appreciate it. You know I think I was just more surprised than anything and yes perhaps the 'tone' of the writing. I'd already made an e17 Squeeze version and Aptosid as i have said I tried before came back to my mind. Remastering an iso is crucial for me, being such a tweak so I know I can save my system and come back to it after messing around. I'm getting tired of messing though so hopefully I'll re-install something and keep it for a few months at least.

But I had read on the Remas site that the developers here didn't support Remastersys (I didn't know discourage). And I think I read it wasn't supposed to work with SID, or, yet I can't recall. 'Pyfll' was not in my sights and I thought what the hell! I love a challenge! but I couldn't find any info and that always gets me going so I wanted to put that info out there and then of course I thought maybe I could save everyone the trouble by sharing it...

No matter what though, I really do love linux. I have my issues with it and it with me, especially when I'm not settled in, but you can only do this stuff with the big 'L'! And one thing always leads to another, yeah?

E17 is a most attractive, and light desktop -- I played with E-live a couple years ago, and maybe I still have a USB stick that boots to E-live. I have thought that if E17 were developed more completely, then it would be an excellent alternative to Xfce, for a light desktop. I have aptosid/Xfce on an old EeePC 4G -- probably aptosid/E17 would be a good choice, too. Don't be discouraged -- you might have a viable distro idea there, if they work out the developmental issues with E17.

xetaprime

Post subject:Posted: 12.06.2011, 00:17

Joined: 2011-06-04
Posts: 81

Status: Offline

Oy! I paid to be able to install elive and when I bought a new computer the code wouldn't work! I wrote them and they never got back to me and no one aswered on the forum but that was one of my first ventures. MoonOS and the PCLinuxOS also. I just have this gut feeling that soon it will be huge! As it becomes more and more available to more users... or, not as the case may be, but I love it! ehh, if that hasn't come across yet.

The thing is I really haven't had any issues for quite some time. It doesn't upset me that occasionally I get an error notice when a window closes because everything is working. Or that not all applications from LXDE show in the menus... But for example I'll download a new distro, top distro to tryout because I'm weak and I'll often have more problems with the bigwigs than I am having now with e17. Maybe it's the 2011 version? idk. It just excites me. I'm excited! Bartender!

As far as you make remastered ISO for yourself's use, I think nobody, including the team member here
does not opose anything. If you share your method of making your customisation, for example writing how to in some wiki, I think it was OK. You learning something by making e17 live system based on ubuntu, debian stable, testing, unstable, then aptosid, it's OK.

When you want to publish the resulting ISO to the world, it becomes something different.

First, as you asked as rebranding, that if it is allowed to publish as "aptosid" (it is not).

Second, you become the "distribution" who is responsible to fullfil the licenses, it means you need to provide the source of the all open source software you include in ISO, (which I never see you interested doing it from what I read in your posts here.)

Third, as you need to make clear that this is not aptosid, and not supported as aptosid.
Then question arises. Who is intended audiense for this "distro" and how Debian sid based installation is supported by you, who seems not having experience with Debian sid?
(as I wrote in closed thread, I don't see point making your ISO for HD installation, since the installed system need to be supported for upgrade with sid repository. I makes only sense that you use it as live system only, or to install multiple times to be trashed soon, not using as "rolling" installation.

My view is aligned with what x-un-i wrote in the thread.

From first point, it is not aptosid, from second point, it's license violation until you will provide the sources... (or not, if nobody demands you to give the source... I did not challanged you...) from the third point, it is problematic distribution for people who installs then left with sid, without support from Debian, not from aptosid... so I understand that the team does not want that your ISO not promoted in this forum, not assosiated with aptosid.

I short, you can do what ever you want with remastersys, but I think you should write about it in your own blog, or other place. Not on the forum of aptosid. What you can do the best for this site is, IMHO, write wiki (not forum thread) about your method of remastering, so that other people who want the custom live ISO in your way may do it himself. for his own use.

(About Ayla's leaving post, personally I don't see why it should have been sent to quarantine.
...but I am not the owner of this furum...)

BUT the main problem here as I see it is how was dealt with a new situation.
If I would like to make a convertible out of my Volkswagen i would also go to the VW forum to get some tips and share information and not blog about it hoping someone reads about it. In a place where one would expect the best chances to find useful and fast information the user got very little help and quarantined at the end.

I am sure ubuntu with his many "based on ubuntu" distributions has rules on how to do it "there way". So wouldn't it be better to sit back and think how to solve the new situation better than just cutting off the hand. I am sure it would not be too much work to write down the rules on how to remaster aptosid, what tools to use and why, branding, artwork, name and so on. This guidelines would sure have helped to avoid most of the trouble.

I use sidux/aptosid for many years now, I love it and I like the fast and good help in the irc and the forum. But I also do not like get answers like "because I said so".
I would really like to know why. The one how started all that which lead to closing a thread is awfully quiet at the moment.

My tip: There is a new situation try dealing with it in a better way than just cutting it out. A little bit more openness could help the project to grow.
I see since years the same people in the irc and here. in fact the irc had more than 100 user when I started and now most of the time around 60. I really wounder since a while why a such a good distribution has so little active user.

As far as you make remastered ISO for yourself's use, I think nobody, including the team member here
does not opose anything. If you share your method of making your customisation, for example writing how to in some wiki, I think it was OK. You learning something by making e17 live system based on ubuntu, debian stable, testing, unstable, then aptosid, it's OK.

ookay.

Quote:

First, as you asked as rebranding, that if it is allowed to publish as "aptosid" (it is not).

I know. That was made clear and while it was up I specifically wrote in the READ ME file that it was 'NOT' an Aptosid release. I did say it was based on it as it was which I think is ok. There was no wallpaper, no Aptosid xfce- I replaced it with LXDE and on and on. Did you download it and look at it? No Aptosid login etc.

Quote:

Second, you become the "distribution" who is responsible to fullfil the licenses, it means you need to provide the source of the all open source software you include in ISO, (which I never see you interested doing it from what I read in your posts here.)

I purposefully didn't respond on this issue as I felt i was being lectured to.

Quote:

Third, as you need to make clear that this is not aptosid, and not supported as aptosid.

We covered that already. That was over when they told me. Why go on about it?

Quote:

Then question arises. Who is intended audiense for this "distro" and how Debian sid based installation is supported by you, who seems not having experience with Debian sid?
(as I wrote in closed thread, I don't see point making your ISO for HD installation, since the installed system need to be supported for upgrade with sid repository. I makes only sense that you use it as live system only, or to install multiple times to be trashed soon, not using as "rolling" installation.

Questions abound do they not. Whay does Aptosid have the option to install to HD? Let's see- What the Hell- on your forum page you have a section for 'Upgrade Warnings' and in there a lot of posts. Come on! It's linux. Things break even in stable. What does one do then? We google for those who have the answers. We learn. Are you saying I can install Aptosid and upgrade it and it will never break?

Quote:

From first point, it is not aptosid, from second point, it's license violation until you will provide the sources... (or not, if nobody demands you to give the source... I did not challanged you...) from the third point, it is problematic distribution for people who installs then left with sid, without support from Debian, not from aptosid... so I understand that the team does not want that your ISO not promoted in this forum, not assosiated with aptosid.

I'm exhausted. When did I ever say it was Aptosid? And I am starting to get the sense now of what people here are talkin about. Mind you I spoke up about why not let me link to my distro- fine, I said I would comply- it was others here who talked of the tone here. Not me. You're not challenging me? ehh, if I write: 'Use at your own risk' and 'Experimental' then how is that problematic? And you know what? If I were searching for a live sid dvd that I could try out even with that warning I would- most probably. Why do you keep bringing up the 'associated with Aptosid'. That's over. It's over. It was over when the link was removed. I may have questioned but I never argued. Read the 'quaratined' thread.

Quote:

I short, you can do what ever you want with remastersys, but I think you should write about it in your own blog, or other place. Not on the forum of aptosid. What you can do the best for this site is, IMHO, write wiki (not forum thread) about your method of remastering, so that other people who want the custom live ISO in your way may do it himself. for his own use.

Wow, then I suggest you get those in charge to remove 'Anything Goes' section and make it clear to people they are not allowed to even mention other distros or tweaks or how-tos. Seriously? In all the time this site and before has been up other programs and distros have not been mentioned? Today's post was not about remastering Aptosid- that is true. But it was about sid and I think remastering whether using Pyfll or Remastersys is important. I really do. Maybe it should be made clear that the program 'Remastersys' is off limits. I never would have shared anything then.

Last edited by xetaprime on 12.06.2011, 02:35; edited 1 time in total

xetaprime

Post subject:Posted: 12.06.2011, 01:51

Joined: 2011-06-04
Posts: 81

Status: Offline

I have to add this. I was so excited when i got Remastersys to work. I had no idea that perhaps others didn't want it to work? Or that it's not a good topic? I had no clue. I was feeling good. Now, not so much.

This thread was yes, about remastersys and I wanted to let those in the know my 'based on' was down. Why bring all this up again? I don't understand? And I'm feeling agida now

muchan

Post subject:Posted: 12.06.2011, 08:14

Moderator

Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 468

Quote:

Quote:
Then question arises. Who is intended audiense for this "distro" and how Debian sid based installation is supported by you, who seems not having experience with Debian sid?
(as I wrote in closed thread, I don't see point making your ISO for HD installation, since the installed system need to be supported for upgrade with sid repository. I makes only sense that you use it as live system only, or to install multiple times to be trashed soon, not using as "rolling" installation.

Questions abound do they not. Whay does Aptosid have the option to install to HD? Let's see- What the Hell- on your forum page you have a section for 'Upgrade Warnings' and in there a lot of posts. Come on! It's linux. Things break even in stable. What does one do then? We google for those who have the answers. We learn. Are you saying I can install Aptosid and upgrade it and it will never break?

It will surely break. That is the point.

Here, is the core of the problem. You don't know the nature of aptosid, the purpose of aptosid.
It is entry poing of the rolling release, the system to be upgraded forever with Debian unstable.
Because Debian unstable repository surely brakes some times, and Debian itself does not support users who can not solve themselves problems of using sid, aptosid provides support, with some rules and restrictions (written in manual).

When the team says yours is not aptosid, and not related to aptosid, and not supported by aptosid, it means
(1) you need to make it clear (yes, you did. but then you should promote anywhere else, not here)
(2) the users of your ISO are left alone after install. If their system broke at dist-upgrade, they are left alone, or should ask *you* to support.

I don't think taling about remastersys itself is problematic. I think in "Scripts & Dragon"forum it's OK.
Learning about pyfll is of course OK. you can make your ISO for your use.
but sharing resulted ISO *is* problematic. So don't write about it here.
(that's my personal opinion.)

xetaprime

Post subject:Posted: 12.06.2011, 10:47

Joined: 2011-06-04
Posts: 81

Status: Offline

Quote:

It will surely break. That is the point.

Then, I ask again, why does the Aptosid cd have the option to install to HD???

Quote:

Here, is the core of the problem. You don't know the nature of aptosid, the purpose of aptosid.

You don't have any idea what I know, honestly. I've been using Linux since 1998. I have been installing Debian testing and unstable to my hd from the beginning of time, it feels like. I'm sure you've read that Debian thinks using SID is foolish. Did I know how to get a program that was not supposed to work in Aptosid work? No, but I got it working well enough for me- just by trying. And I think well enough for others who are curious.

Quote:

It is entry poing of the rolling release, the system to be upgraded forever with Debian unstable.
Because Debian unstable repository surely brakes some times, and Debian itself does not support users who can not solve themselves problems of using sid, aptosid provides support, with some rules and restrictions (written in manual).

Can you answer from your personal view then, again, why people are allowed to install it to their had drives?

Quote:

When the team says yours is not aptosid, and not related to aptosid, and not supported by aptosid, it means
(1) you need to make it clear (yes, you did. but then you should promote anywhere else, not here)

The Quarantined thread was closed and I had stopped 'mentioning' it right away. This thread- oh, never mind... (sigh)

Quote:

(2) the users of your ISO are left alone after install. If their system broke at dist-upgrade, they are left alone, or should ask *you* to support.

I feel so alone

Last edited by xetaprime on 12.06.2011, 10:54; edited 2 times in total

slam

Post subject:Posted: 12.06.2011, 10:50

Team Member

Joined: 1970-01-01
Posts: 607
Location: w3
Status: Offline

Thanks Muchan, your latest post is a very fine summary about the issue. Yes. just talking about re-mastersys experiences in our forums is of course ok - given that you can take some critics and do not expect just praise. We do discourage people to remaster, because there are technical concerns, you already mentioned some of them. However, everyone is free to re-master in private and for personal private use.

The OT however started to publish download links to isos of his re-masters, and this is where the team being actually legally responsible for the content of aptosid.com (and not just users with private opinions) needed to take action. This action was documented and clearly explained to the OT. All this additional talk about "unfriendliness and style of communication" from other people who jumped in is not related to OT's issue, and just a try to pirate his issue with personal matters with a long history. Pirating and abusing other people posts is actually very unfriendly, by the way.

And to finally mention the technicially best way to solve OT's problem and help everyone: If you love e17, get involved into the upstream project, and help the Debian maintainers. That way 417 will be in better shape in Debian sid and Aptosid, and officially supported. After that building a working Aptosid e17 will be easy, and if we find a team of people who do commit themselves to long-term support and testing we might be able to even officially release an e17 variant some day in the future.

We do discourage people to remaster, because there are technical concerns, you already mentioned some of them. However, everyone is free to re-master in private and for personal private use.

Which technical concerns did he mention again? That SID is unstable? Then I will ask again for an answer- if Aptosid should not be installed on a hd, why does the installer have that option? I think this is a fair question considering I've been told it's a bad idea and I'm glad you think people are free to do what they want in their private life.

Quote:

And to finally mention the technicially best way to solve OT's problem and help everyone: If you love e17, get involved into the upstream project, and help the Debian maintainers.

Just to be clear, my problem had nothing to do with e17. I know how to install e17. My initial problem was with remastersys glitches which were minor and most were addressed. So in my opinion, I have no problem at the moment other than the continuing talk of the linking to other distros that really should be over with.

Sincerely,
Xeta

(sent from my squeeze to sid e17 remaster)

xetaprime

Post subject:Posted: 12.06.2011, 13:32

Joined: 2011-06-04
Posts: 81

Status: Offline

Quote:

aptosid is a full featured Debian sid based live CD with a special focus on hard disk installations, a clean upgrade path within sid and additional hardware and software support. The ISO is completely based on Debian sid, enriched and stabilized with aptosid' own packages and scripts.

muchan, you feel Aptosid should not be installed to a hard disk? Only USB? The above does not specify USB. It specifically says hd installations- plural and that it's 'stabilized' If I'm ganged up on for installing to hard drive, can you or a team member explain further? If you discourage HD installation why release Aptosid with this option?

Sincerely,
Xeta

ghstryder

Post subject:Posted: 12.06.2011, 13:45

Joined: 2010-09-12
Posts: 96
Location: Detroit
Status: Offline

I had at least some degree of sympathy for you in the beginning, even though it seemed obvious that the problem was using the aptosid forum to promote *your* iso. Now you are beginning to sound irrational. Take some of the emotion out of it, and think it through again.

On a personal note; in a world where people are afraid to speak their mind, where opinions must be couched in touchy-feely fluff, I find the straight-forward approach of the mods to be a breath of fresh air. I have not always agreed with their approach, but then, it is always their forum, and their distro.